Observation 93435: Morchella ulmaria Clowez
When: 2012-04-27
No herbarium specimen

Notes: Under old apple trees. One batch for each of two trees. Except the last photo shows one of two that were found under a dead elm that was nearby the apple trees.

Proposed Names

-4% (2)
Recognized by sight: IF this morel corresponds to what Kuo was calling esculentoides, californica is the validly published name.
29% (1)
Recognized by sight
56% (1)
Eyes3
Recognized by sight

Please login to propose your own names and vote on existing names.

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Okay, a possible match for…
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2014-02-21 08:01:20 EST (-0500)

the former cryptica.

The NA morel formerly called “esculenta”, except for the thick-footed former “crassipes”, sometimes referred to as member of the esculenta group, but briefly called “esculentoides”, except for the very similar ulmaria which had briefly gone by the name “cryptica”, excluding the irregularly shaped prava which resembles the presumably European vulgaris, may be semi-confidently assigned the name “americana”… for the time being.

Interestingly, in one quarter square mile patchwork of old overgrown family-farm orchards where I have collected morels since 1993 (including this obs), I have found examples that match well with each of americana, ulmaria, and prava. In particular, one apple tree (now dead and gone) used to associate exclusively with a dark-pitted irregularly-shaped type that matches the description of prava.

BTW, soil test for lead came up clean.

Ha!
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2014-02-20 20:12:45 EST (-0500)

Thanks Walt. You have saved me the effort of changing the rest of my old “esculenta group” or “esculentoides” proposals… at least for the time being.

So there’s still no current consensus on the name for the (presumably) most common eastern NA robust yellow morel.

At least for me for the time being…
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2012-06-25 07:44:12 EDT (-0400)

it’s back to “Morchella esculenta group” or “clade” or whatever.

confusion …. just a bit
By: Dennis Oliver
2012-06-25 06:25:04 EDT (-0400)

It’s unfortunate that the long awaited clarification of Morchella has run into this nomenclatural nightmare of two sets of names. Clowez published his names first hence have priority over Kuo et al.

The questions of what the names cover is confused and hopefully Kerry O’Donnell who is working with the French,comparing the DNA will be able to sort it all out and we can be confident in the names we put on our collections of morels. Hopefully the spores will be settled by next spring.

Well, at least they kill the conversation!
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2012-06-24 23:26:32 EDT (-0400)

“So what type of morels are those?” “Oh these? they’re Morchella californica.” “Oh, so you got those from California?”

Yep, sad huh?
By: Noah Siegel (Noah)
2012-06-24 23:14:22 EDT (-0400)

Guns don’t kill people, bad taxonomist do…

So, this morel, reported as…
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2012-06-24 23:11:43 EDT (-0400)

“…widely distributed and common east of the Rocky Mountains…” as stated in the Kuo report should be called “californica?”

Rules of nomenclature notwithstanding, that’s just a little hard to take. This morel, gathered in massive amounts by midwesterners has as its namesake, California?

Okay. So the first person to isolate the DNA for this type did so for a specimen gathered in California (I presume?). That means that when some Iowan drags home a gunnysack full, it’s “the one that grows in California” and not “the one that looks like esculenta.”

Created: 2012-04-27 19:42:40 EDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2014-02-20 20:14:09 EST (-0500)
Viewed: 159 times, last viewed: 2016-06-22 19:28:22 EDT (-0400)
Show Log